scholarly journals Comparison of Outcomes Between Transperitoneal and Retroperitoneal Robotic Partial Nephrectomy: A Meta-Analysis Based on Comparative Studies

2021 ◽  
Vol 10 ◽  
Author(s):  
Daqing Zhu ◽  
Xue Shao ◽  
Gang Guo ◽  
Nandong Zhang ◽  
Taoping Shi ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Publication Bias ◽  
Comparative Studies ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Positive Surgical Margin ◽  
Robotic Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Matched Design

BackgroundTo compare perioperative, functional and oncological outcomes between transperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy (TRPN) and retroperitoneal robotic partial nephrectomy (RRPN).MethodsA literature searching of Pubmed, Embase, Cochrane Library and Web of Science was performed in August, 2020. Pooled odds ratios (ORs) or weighted mean differences (WMDs) with 95% confidence intervals (CIs) were estimated using fixed-effect or random-effect model. Publication bias was evaluated with funnel plots. Only comparative studies with matched design or similar baseline characteristics were included.ResultsEleven studies embracing 2,984 patients were included. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding conversion to open (P = 0.44) or radical (P = 0.31) surgery, all complications (P = 0.06), major complications (P = 0.07), warm ischemia time (P = 0.73), positive surgical margin (P = 0.87), decline in eGFR (P = 0.42), CKD upstaging (P = 0.72), and total recurrence (P = 0.66). Patients undergoing TRPN had a significant higher minor complications (P = 0.04; OR: 1.39; 95% CI, 1.01–1.91), longer operative time (P < 0.001; WMD: 21.68; 95% CI, 11.61 to 31.76), more estimated blood loss (EBL, P = 0.002; WMD: 40.94; 95% CI, 14.87 to 67.01), longer length of hospital stay (LOS, P < 0.001; WMD: 0.86; 95% CI, 0.35 to 1.37). No obvious publication bias was identified.ConclusionRRPN is more favorable than TRPN in terms of less minor complications, shorter operative time, less EBL, and shorter LOS. Methodological limitations of the included studies should be considered while interpreting these results.

scholarly journals Comparison of robotic and laparoscopic partial nephrectomy for small renal tumours

2017 ◽  
Vol 89 (2) ◽  
pp. 93 ◽  
Author(s):  
Abdulmuttalip Simsek ◽  
Abdullah Hizir Yavuzsan ◽  
Yunus Colakoglu ◽  
Arda Atar ◽  
Selcuk Sahin ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Functional Outcomes ◽  
Surgical Margin ◽  
Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Positive Surgical Margin ◽  
Robotic Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Asa Score ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Renal Tumours ◽  
Significant Difference

Objective: To evaluate a single surgeon oncological and functional outcomes of laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) compared to robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) for pT1a renal tumours. Materials and methods: Between 2006 and 2016, a retrospective review of 42 patients who underwent LPN (n = 20) or RPN (n = 22) by same surgeon was performed. Patients were matched for gender, age, body mass index (BMI), American Society of Anaesthesiologists (ASA) score, tumour side, RENAL and PADUA scores, peri-operative and post-operative outcomes. Results: There was no significant differences between the two groups with respect to patient gender, age, BMI, ASA score, tumours side, RENAL and PADUA scores. Mean operative time for RPN was 176 vs. 227 minutes for LPN (p = 0.001). Warm ischemia time was similar in both groups (p = 0.58). Estimated blood loss (EBL) was higher in the LPN. There was no significant difference with preoperative and postoperative creatinine and percent change in eGFR levels. Only one case in LPN had positive surgical margin. Conclusions: RPN is a developing procedure, and technically feasible and safe for small-size renal tumours. Moreover RPN is a comparable and alternative operation to LPN, providing equivalent oncological and functional outcomes, as well as saving more healthy marginal tissue and easier and faster suturing.

scholarly journals Robotic partial nephrectomy for renal tumours in obese patients: Perioperative outcomes in a multi-institutional analysis

2015 ◽  
Vol 9 (11-12) ◽  
pp. 859 ◽  
Author(s):  
Newaj Abdullah ◽  
Deepansh Dalela ◽  
Ravi Barod ◽  
Jeff Larson ◽  
Michael Johnson ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Regression Analysis ◽  
Blood Loss ◽  
Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Independent Predictor ◽  
Operating Time ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Robotic Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Obese Patients ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss

<p><strong>Introduction: </strong>We sought to evaluate the association of obesity with surgical outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) using a large, multicentre database.<strong> </strong></p><p><strong>Methods: </strong>We identified 1836 patients who underwent RPN from five academic centres from 2006-2014.  A total of 806 patients were obese (body mass index [BMI] ≥30 kg/m<sup>2</sup>). Patient characteristics and outcomes were compared between obese and non-obese patients. Multivariable analysis was used to assess the association of obesity on RPN outcomes.</p><p><strong>Results: </strong>A total of 806 (44%) patients were obese with median BMI of 33.8kg/m<sup>2</sup>. Compared to non-obese patients, obese patients had greater median tumour size (2.9 vs. 2.5 cm, p&lt;0.001), mean RENAL nephrometry score (7.3 vs. 7.1, p = 0.04), median operating time (176 vs. 165 min, p=0.002), and median estimated blood loss (EBL, 150 vs. 100 ml, p=0.002), but no difference in complications. Obesity was not an independent predictor of operative time or EBL on regression analysis. Among obese patients, males had a greater EBL (150 vs. 100 ml, p&lt;0.001), operative time (180 vs. 166 min, p&lt;0.001) and warm ischemia time (WIT, 20 vs. 18, p=0.001) and male sex was an independent predictor of these outcomes on regression analysis.</p><p><strong>Conclusion: </strong>In this large, multicentre study on RPN, obesity was not associated with increased complications and was not an independent predictor of operating time or blood loss.  However, in obese patients, male gender was an independent predictor of greater EBL, operative time, and WIT.  Our results indicate that obesity alone should not preclude consideration for RPN.<strong></strong></p>

scholarly journals Comparison of Robotic Versus Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy For Renal Tumors With A RENAL Nephrometry Score≥7: A System Review and Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jin-Biao Zhou ◽  
Xin Xiao ◽  
Tian-Li Shi ◽  
Xiao-Hui Huang ◽  
Yu-Li Jiang
Keyword(s):  
Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Intraoperative Complications ◽  
Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Renal Tumors ◽  
Perioperative Outcomes ◽  
Positive Surgical Margin ◽  
Robotic Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Cochrane Central Register ◽  
Nephrometry Score ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss

Abstract Background To compare the perioperative outcomes of robotic partial nephrectomy (RPN) versus laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) for complex renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score≥7. Methods We searched PubMed, EMBASE and the Cochrane Central Register for studies from 2000 to 2020 to evaluate the perioperative outcomes of RPN and LPN in patients with a RENAL nephrometry score≥7. We used RevMan 5.2 to pool the data. Results Seven studies were acquired in our study. No significant differences were found in the estimated blood loss (WMD: 34.49; 95% CI: -75.16-144.14; p=0.54), hospital stay (WMD: -0.59; 95% CI: -1.24–0.06; p=0.07), positive surgical margin (OR: 0.85; 95% CI: 0.65–1.11; p =0.23), major postoperative complications(OR: 0.90; 95% CI: 0.52–1.54; p=0.69) and transfusion (OR: 0.72; 95% CI: 0.48–1.08; p =0.11) between the groups. RPN showed better outcomes in the operating time (WMD: -22.45; 95% CI: -35.06 to -9.85; p=0.0005), postoperative renal function (WMD: 3.32; 95% CI: 0.73–5.91; p=0.01), warm ischemia time (WMD: -6.96; 95% CI: -7.30–-6.62; p <0.0001), conversion rate to radical nephrectomy (OR: 0.34; 95% CI: 0.17 to 0.66; p=0.002) and intraoperative complications (OR: 0.52; 95% CI: 0.28–0.97; p=0.04).Conclusions RPN showed better perioperative clinical outcomes than LPN for the treatment of complex renal tumors with a RENAL nephrometry score≥7.

scholarly journals Radiofrequency Ablation-Assisted Zero-Ischemia Robotic Laparoscopic Partial Nephrectomy: Oncologic and Functional Outcomes in 49 Patients

2016 ◽  
Vol 2016 ◽  
pp. 1-6 ◽  
Author(s):  
Kalen Rimar ◽  
Aziz Khambati ◽  
Barry B. McGuire ◽  
David A. Rebuck ◽  
Kent T. Perry ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Radiofrequency Ablation ◽  
Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Functional Outcomes ◽  
Comparison Group ◽  
Positive Surgical Margin ◽  
Robotic Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Transfusion Rate ◽  
Urine Leak ◽  
Significant Difference

Introduction and Objectives. Robotic partial nephrectomy with peritumoral radiofrequency ablation (RFA-RPN) is a novel clampless technique. We describe oncologic and functional outcomes in a prospective cohort. Methods. From May, 2007, to December, 2009, 49 consecutive patients with renal masses <7 cm underwent RFA-RPN. During this period, only the RFA-RPN technique was utilized for all cases of partial nephrectomy. Pre- and postoperative data were analyzed and compared to 36 consecutive patients who underwent LPN. Results. In total, 49 tumors were treated in the RFA-RPN group and 36 tumors in the comparison group. Mean operative time was longer in the RFA-RPN group (370 min versus 293 min, p<0.001). There were no significant differences in mean EBL (231 cc versus 250 cc, p=0.42), transfusion rate (8.2% versus 11.1%, p=0.7), or hospital stay (3.9 versus 4.4 days, p=0.2). Two patients in the RFA-RPN (4.1%) and 1 (2.7%) patient in the comparison group had a positive surgical margin (p=0.75). 17 (34.7%) patients had a postoperative urine leak in the RFA-RPN group versus 2 (5.6%) patients in the comparison group (p=0.001). Mean follow-up was 54 months versus 68.4 months in the comparison group. There was no significant difference between the two groups regarding change in GFR (p=0.67). There were 3 recurrences (6.1%) in the RFA-RPN group and 0 recurrences in the RPN group (p=0.23). There were 3 deaths (6.1%) in the RFA-RPN group (one cancer specific) and 4 deaths (11.1%) in the RPN group (non-cancer specific) over the follow-up period (p=0.44). Conclusions. Our data suggests that this technique is associated with a similar degree of renal preservation but higher rates of postoperative urine leak and possibly higher rates of recurrence.

scholarly journals Comparison of functional and oncological outcomes of innovative “three-port” and traditional “four-port” laparoscopic radical prostatectomy in patients with prostate cancer

BMC Urology ◽  
2021 ◽  
Vol 21 (1) ◽  
Author(s):  
Ben Xu ◽  
Si-da Cheng ◽  
Yi-ji Peng ◽  
Qian Zhang
Keyword(s):  
Prostate Cancer ◽  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Biochemical Recurrence ◽  
Laparoscopic Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Positive Surgical Margin ◽  
Oncological Outcomes ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B

Abstract Background To compare the functional and oncological outcomes between innovative “three-port” and traditional “four-port” laparoscopic radical prostatectomy (LRP) in patients with prostate cancer (PCa). Methods We retrospectively collected the data of PCa patients treated at our institutions from June 2012 to May 2016. According to the inclusion criteria, a total of 234 patients were included in the study, including 112 in group A (four-port) and 122 in group B (three-port). The perioperatively surgical characteristics, functional and oncological outcomes were compared between groups. Results There were no statistical differences in the baseline parameters between these two groups. Compared with group A, the operative time (OT) and estimated blood loss (EBL) were significantly less in group B. On follow-up, the rate of positive surgical margin (PSM), prostate specific antigen (PSA) biochemical recurrence and continence after LRP did not show any statistically significant difference between the groups. An identical conclusion was also received in comparison of overall survival (OS) and biochemical recurrence-free survival (BRFS) between both groups. Conclusions Innovative “three-port” LRP can significantly shorten the OT and reduce the EBL compared with the traditional “four-port” LRP. Meanwhile, it does not increase the rate of PSM and PSA biochemical recurrence. “Three-port” LRP could be popularized in the future in view of its superior surgical technique, considerably better functional outcomes and remarkable oncological control.

Laparoscopic versus open partial nephrectomy for the management of highly complex renal tumors with PADUA score ⩾10: A single center analysis.

2021 ◽  
pp. 039156032110016
Author(s):  
Francesco Chiancone ◽  
Marco Fabiano ◽  
Clemente Meccariello ◽  
Maurizio Fedelini ◽  
Francesco Persico ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Operation Time ◽  
Renal Tumors ◽  
Open Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Operative Complications ◽  
Group A ◽  
Group B ◽  
Post Operative Complications

Introduction: The aim of this study was to compare laparoscopic and open partial nephrectomy (PN) for renal tumors of high surgical complexity (PADUA score ⩾10). Methods: We retrospectively evaluated 93 consecutive patients who underwent PN at our department from January 2015 to September 2019. 21 patients underwent open partial nephrectomy (OPN) (Group A) and 72 underwent laparoscopic partial nephrectomy (LPN) (Group B). All OPNs were performed with a retroperitoneal approach, while all LPNs were performed with a transperitoneal approach by a single surgical team. Post-operative complications were classified according to the Clavien-Dindo system. Results: The two groups showed no difference in terms of patients’ demographics as well as tumor characteristics in all variables. Group A was found to be similar to group B in terms of operation time ( p = 0.781), conversion to radical nephrectomy ( p = 0.3485), and positive surgical margins ( p = 0.338) while estimated blood loss ( p = 0.0205), intra-operative ( p = 0.0104), and post-operative ( p = 0.0081) transfusion rates, drainage time ( p = 0.0012), pain score at post-operative day 1 (<0.0001) were significantly lower in Group B. The rate of enucleation and enucleoresection/polar resection was similar ( p = 0.1821) among the groups. Logistic regression analysis indicated that preoperative factors were not independently associated with the surgical approach. There was a statistically significant difference in complication rate (<0.0001) between the two groups even if no significant difference in terms of grade ⩾3 post-operative complications ( p = 0.3382) was detected. Discussion: LPN represents a feasible and safe approach for high complex renal tumors if performed in highly experienced laparoscopic centers. This procedure offers good intraoperative outcomes and a low rate of post-operative complications.

scholarly journals Reguliuojamos skrandžio apjuosimo juostos: lyginamųjų studijų apžvalga

2011 ◽  
Vol 9 (1-2) ◽  
pp. 0-0
Author(s):  
Tomas Abalikšta ◽  
Gintautas Brimas ◽  
Kęstutis Strupas
Keyword(s):  
Weight Loss ◽  
Comparative Studies ◽  
University Hospital ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Band Slippage ◽  
Lap Band ◽  
Number Of Patients ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Gastric Bands

Tomas Abalikšta, Gintautas Brimas, Kęstutis Strupas Vilniaus universiteto Medicinos fakultetas, M. K. Čiurlionio g. 21, LT-03101 VilniusVilniaus universiteto ligoninės Santariškių klinikų Pilvo chirurgijos centras,Santariškių g. 2, LT-08661 VilniusEl. paštas: [email protected] Darbo tikslas: Remiantis literatūros duomenimis palyginti skirtingas skrandžio apjuosimo reguliuojamas juostas, naudojamas chirurginiam nutukimo gydymui. Tyriamoji medžiaga ir metodai: Publikacijų paieška atlikta elektroninėse MEDLINE, Current Contents ir Cochrane Library duomenų bazėse. Apžvelgtos visos skrandį apjuosiančių reguliuojamų juostų lyginamųjų studijų publikacijos, paskelbtos iki 2010 m. sausio 1 d. Rezultatai: Atlikus literatūros šaltinių paiešką rasta 10 publikacijų, lyginančių skirtingas skrandį apjuosiančias reguliuojamas juostas. Išsamiai atlikta viena studija: perspektyvi, atsitiktinių imčių, jos tiriamųjų skaičius didelis ir stebėjimo laikotarpis ilgas, įvertinti visi gydymo rezultatai. Statistiškai reikšmingo skirtumo tarp SAGB ir LAP-BAND juostų šioje studijoje nerasta. Kitos lyginamosios juostų studijos turi trūkumų: keturios buvo ne atsitiktinių imčių (dvi iš jų retrospektyvios), trijose tiriamųjų imtis maža, visų stebėjimo laikas trumpas. Vienoje iš šių studijų nustatytas kūno masės kritimo skirtumas tarp grupių: LAP-BAND grupėje pradinė viršnorminė kūno masė sumažėjo 41,7 %, Heliogast – 28,3 %. Mechaninių juostų komplikacijų dažnis skyrėsi vienoje studijoje: LAP-BAND – 7 %, SAGB – 1 %. Skirtumas tarp „mažo skrandžio“ išsiplėtimo arba juostos nuslinkimo dažnio rastas trijose studijose (MiniMizer Extra – 0 % ir LAP-BAND – 10,8 %; SAGB – 2,4 % ir LAP-BAND – 27,6 %; SAGB – 2 % ir LAP-BAND – 23 %). Skirtumo tarp gretutinių ligų ir gyvenimo kokybės pokyčio, hospitalizacijos trukmės, juostos reguliavimų skaičiaus/dažnio, juostos penetracijos/migracijos į skrandį bei infekcinių komplikacijų dažnio nerasta. Išvados: Tik viena studija atlikta laikantis šiuolaikinių įrodymais pagrįstos medicinos keliamų reikalavimų, skirtumo tarp lygintų juostų nerasta. Reikalingos perspektyvios, atsitiktinių imčių ilgalaikės (>5 metų) lyginamosios studijos, vertinančios juostų konstrukcijos ar formos skirtumų įtaką gydymo efektyvumui ar komplikacijoms. Reikšminiai žodžiai: nutukimas, bariatrinė chirurgija, skrandžio apjuosimo reguliuojama juosta operacija. Adjustable gastric bands: review of comparative studies Tomas Abalikšta, Gintautas Brimas, Kęstutis Strupas Vilnius University Medical Faculty, M. K. Čiurlionio Str. 21, LT-03101 Vilnius, LithuaniaVilnius University Hospital Santariškių Klinikos Centre of Abdominal Surgery,Santariškių Str. 2, LT-08661 Vilnius, LithuaniaEl. paštas: [email protected] Objective: The objective of this review is to compare different adjustable gastric bands according to the data of comparative studies. Materials and Methods: A search of articles published in any language before January 2010 was carried out through the MEDLINE, Current Contents and Cochrane Library electronic databases. All articles about comparative studies of different adjustable gastric bands were eligible for review. All possible data were extracted from accepted studies and reviewed. Results: Ten comparative studies of different adjustable gastric bands were accepted. Only one comparative study of the bands was accomplished properly. It was a prospective randomised study type with a large number of patients and a long follow-up period with all possible results evaluated. No statistically significant difference between SAGB and LAP-BAND gastric bands was found in this study. The other band studies had shortcomings: four studies were non-randomised (two of them retrospective), a small number of patients in three studies, and a too short follow-up period in all studies. The difference in weight loss was stated in one of these studies: 41.7% of initial excess weight loss in the LAP-BAND group and 28.3% in the Heliogast group. Band leakage frequency was different in one study: LAP-BAND – 7%, SAGB – 1%. A difference between pouch dilatation or band slippage frequency was found in three studies (MiniMizer Extra – 0% and LAP-BAND – 10.8%; SAGB – 2.4% and LAP-BAND – 27.6%; SAGB – 2% and LAP-BAND – 23%). There was no difference between the resolution of comorbidities, improvement of the quality of life, hospital stay, band adjustment frequency, band migration or band infection rate. Conclusion: Only one accepted study was accomplished properly. There was no difference between compared adjustable gastric bands in this study. Prospective randomised long-term (more than 5 years) comparative studies are needed for a proper evaluation of band construction or shape influence on weight loss and complications. Keywords: obesity, bariatric surgery, adjustable gastric banding.

scholarly journals Comparison of Retzius-Sparing Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy vs. Conventional Robot-Assisted Radical Prostatectomy: An Up-to-Date Meta-Analysis

2021 ◽  
Vol 8 ◽  
Author(s):  
Jiang-Nan Xu ◽  
Zhen-Yu Xu ◽  
Hu-Ming Yin
Keyword(s):  
Radical Prostatectomy ◽  
Lower Incidence ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Urinary Continence ◽  
Robot Assisted ◽  
Postoperative Continence ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Anterior Prostate

Background: The Retzius space-sparing robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (RS-RARP) has shown better results in urinary continence, but its efficacy and safety compared to conventional robot-assisted radical prostatectomy (c-RARP) remain controversial.Material and Methods: A research was conducted in Medline via PubMed, Cochrane Library, EMBASE, and Web of Science up to January 4, 2021, to identify studies comparing RS-RARP to c-RARP. We used RevMan 5.3 and STATA 14.0 for meta-analysis.Results: A total of 14 studies involving 3,129 participants were included. Meta-analysis showed no significant difference in positive surgical margins (PSMs), but the RS-RARP group had significantly higher PSM rates in the anterior site [odds ratio (OR) = 2.25, 95% CI: 1.22–4.16, P = 0.01]. Postoperative continence in RS-RARP group at 1 month (OR = 5.72, 95% CI: 3.56–9.19, P &lt; 0.01), 3 months (OR = 6.44, 95% CI: 4.50–9.22, P &lt; 0.01), 6 months (OR = 8.68, 95% CI: 4.01–18.82, P &lt; 0.01), and 12 months (OR = 2.37, 95% CI: 1.20–4.70, P = 0.01) was significantly better than that in the c-RARP group. In addition, the RS-RARP group had a shorter console time (mean difference = −16.28, 95% CI: −27.04 to −5.53, P = 0.003) and a lower incidence of hernia (OR = 0.35, 95% CI: 0.19–0.67, P = 0.001). However, there were no significant differences in estimated blood loss, pelvic lymph node dissection rate, postoperative complications, 1-year-biochemical recurrence rate, and postoperative sexual function.Conclusions: Compared with c-RARP, RS-RARP showed better recovery of continence, shorter console time, and lower incidence of hernia. Although there was no significant difference in overall PSM, we suggest that the surgeon should be more careful if the lesion is in the anterior prostate.

scholarly journals Laparoscopy versus mini-laparotomy peritoneal catheter insertion of ventriculoperitoneal shunts: a systematic review and meta-analysis

2016 ◽  
Vol 41 (3) ◽  
pp. E7 ◽  
Author(s):  
Mingliang He ◽  
Leping Ouyang ◽  
Shengwen Wang ◽  
Meiguang Zheng ◽  
Anmin Liu
Keyword(s):  
Systematic Reviews ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Meta Analysis ◽  
Catheter Insertion ◽  
Cochrane Library ◽  
Number Needed To Treat ◽  
Shunt Failure ◽  
Peritoneal Catheter ◽  
Significant Difference ◽  
Mini Laparotomy

OBJECTIVE Ventriculoperitoneal (VP) shunt treatment is the main treatment method for hydrocephalus. The traditional operative approach for peritoneal catheter insertion is mini-laparotomy. In recent years, laparoscopy-assisted insertion has become increasingly popular. It seems likely that use of an endoscope could lower the incidence of shunt malfunction. However, there is no consensus about the benefits of laparoscopy-assisted peritoneal catheter insertion. METHODS A systematic search was performed using the PubMed, Embase, ScienceDirect, and Cochrane Library databases. A manual search for reference lists was conducted. The protocol was prepared according to the interventional systematic reviews of the Cochrane Handbook, and the article was written on the basis of the PRISMA (Preferred Reporting Items for Systematic Reviews and Meta-Analysis) guidelines. RESULTS Eleven observational trials and 2 randomized controlled trials were included. Seven operation-related outcome measures were analyzed, and 3 of these showed no difference between operative techniques. The results of the meta-analysis are as follows: in the laparoscopy group, the rate of distal shunt failure was lower (OR 0.41, 95% CI 0.25–0.67; p = 0.0003), the absolute effect is 7.11% for distal shunt failure, the number needed to treat is 14 (95% CI 8–23), operative time was shorter (mean difference [MD], −12.84; 95% CI −20.68 to −5.00; p = 0.001), and blood loss was less (MD −9.93, 95% CI −17.56 to −2.31; p = 0.01). In addition, a borderline statistically significant difference tending to laparoscopic technique was observed in terms of hospital stay (MD −1.77, 95% CI −3.67 to 0.13; p = 0.07). CONCLUSIONS To some extent, a laparoscopic insertion technique could yield a better prognosis, mainly because it is associated with a lower distal failure rate and shorter operative time, which would be clinically relevant.

scholarly journals Retroperitoneal hand-assisted laparoscopic nephrectomy and partial nephrectomy

2013 ◽  
Vol 3 (1) ◽  
pp. 3 ◽  
Author(s):  
Nosratollah Nezakatzgoo ◽  
Janet Colli ◽  
Matthew Mutter ◽  
Sheg Aranmolate ◽  
Robert Wake
Keyword(s):  
Partial Nephrectomy ◽  
Operative Time ◽  
Harmonic Scalpel ◽  
Oral Intake ◽  
Pathological Examination ◽  
Tumor Diameter ◽  
Renal Masses ◽  
Estimated Blood Loss ◽  
Average Operative Time

The purpose of the present paper is to describe our technique and experience with retroperitoneal hand-assisted laparoscopic (HAL) nephrectomies as an alternative to the transperitoneal approach. Eight retroperitoneal HAL nephrectomies and one partial nephrectomy were performed. Several excisional techniques were employed incorporating the Harmonic scalpel or Ligasure device. Hemostatic agents were used to cover the renal defect. Surgical bolsters were sutured to the renal capsule with pleget reinforcements to aid in hemostasis. The average operative time was 210 min and estimated blood loss 110 mL. Mean change in hematocrit was 3 units and creatinine was 1 point. No patient required a transfusion. There were no major complications, with a mean follow-up of fourteen months. On average, patients resumed oral intake in 2 days, and were discharged in 3 days. Pathological examination revealed that two lesions were benign and seven malignant. Tumor diameter averaged 3 cm. There were no positive surgical margins. In conclusion, we have demonstrated the feasibility of retroperitoneal laparoscopic hand-assisted nephrectomy and partial nephrectomy surgery for solid renal masses.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document